CVE-2026-55762
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedRocket.Chat is an open-source, secure, fully customizable communications platform. Prior to 8.5.1, 8.4.4, 8.3.6, 8.2.6, 8.1.6, 8.0.7, and 7.10.13, the POST /api/v1/fingerprint REST endpoint enforces authentication (authRequired: true) but performs no authorization check. Any authenticated user — including a standard user role account — can call this endpoint with {"setDeploymentAs": "new-workspace"} to permanently deregister the workspace from Rocket.Chat Cloud. This wipes all cloud credentials, removes the workspace license, breaks push notifications for all users, and requires manual re-registration to recover. This vulnerability is fixed in 8.5.1, 8.4.4, 8.3.6, 8.2.6, 8.1.6, 8.0.7, and 7.10.13.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe POST /api/v1/fingerprint endpoint in Rocket.Chat enforces authentication but lacks authorization checks, allowing any authenticated user (including standard user accounts) to permanently deregister the workspace from Rocket.Chat Cloud by sending {"setDeploymentAs": "new-workspace"}. This destructive action wipes cloud credentials, removes the workspace license, and breaks push notifications for all users.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Rocket.Chat versionRun `rocketctl version` or check the version from the admin panel at /admin/info, or query the /api/v1/info endpointAffected if Version is earlier than 7.10.13, 8.0.7, 8.1.6, 8.2.6, 8.3.6, 8.4.4, or 8.5.1
-
Confirm /api/v1/fingerprint endpoint existsSend an authenticated GET request to /api/v1/fingerprint and verify the endpoint respondsAffected if Endpoint returns a valid response (even with 401 if auth not provided, meaning the endpoint is exposed)
-
Check if authentication is enforcedSend an unauthenticated request to /api/v1/fingerprint and verify it returns 401 or requires credentialsAffected if Authentication IS enforced (returns 401 without credentials), but authorization is NOT checked for authenticated users
-
Verify authorization policy on fingerprint endpointUse admin panel at /admin/settings/OAuth or inspect API permission settings to confirm if /api/v1/fingerprint has role-based access controlsAffected if No role-based permission restrictions are configured for the fingerprint endpoint, allowing any authenticated user access
-
Check workspace cloud registration statusNavigate to /admin/cloud or query the workspace cloud settings to see if the workspace is connected to Rocket.Chat CloudAffected if Workspace is currently registered with Rocket.Chat Cloud (indicating the destructive action would have impact)
You are affected if your Rocket.Chat version is before the fixed releases AND the /api/v1/fingerprint endpoint is accessible to standard users without authorization checks, especially if your workspace is connected to Rocket.Chat Cloud.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade Rocket.Chat to version 7.10.13, 8.0.7, 8.1.6, 8.2.6, 8.3.6, 8.4.4, or 8.5.1 or later, which contain the authorization fix for this vulnerability.
Upgrade to Rocket.Chat 8.5.1 (or one of the fixed versions: 8.4.4, 8.3.6, 8.2.6, 8.1.6, 8.0.7, or 7.10.13)
- Identify current Rocket.Chat version by checking the running instance or deployment configuration
- Plan maintenance window as upgrade may require brief service restart
- Backup current database and configuration files before proceeding
- Upgrade Rocket.Chat to version 8.5.1 (or 8.4.4, 8.3.6, 8.2.6, 8.1.6, 8.0.7, or 7.10.13 depending on your release train)
- After upgrade, verify the POST /api/v1/fingerprint endpoint now properly enforces authorization (should require admin/owner role)
- Test that legitimate workspace cloud registration functionality works correctly
- Monitor logs for any unauthorized attempts to access this endpoint
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-55762 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-55762 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data